Comparison of Eye Tracking for Mobiles and Stations: Design Analysis and In-Store Findings
In a groundbreaking study, researchers have compared the effectiveness of stationary and mobile eye tracking in the context of consumer perception and behavior. This comparative analysis is the first of its kind in the marketing field, highlighting the significant impact that the chosen eye tracking method can have on research results.
Stationary eye tracking, a method commonly used in controlled lab settings, typically captures gaze when participants view static, screen-based stimuli. The first fixation location tends to be heavily influenced by the screen layout and experimental design, often resulting in fixations centered around screen-based elements. On the other hand, mobile eye tracking records gaze behavior in real-world or dynamic environments, providing a more ecologically valid and contextually relevant analysis due to its ability to account for head pose, body movement, and complex scene exploration.
Mobile eye tracking offers several advantages for studying consumer perception and behavior. It captures natural visual attention and gaze patterns in real shopping or interaction environments, reflecting how consumers actually perceive and respond to products and displays in situ. Additionally, it allows for synchronization of gaze with real-world actions, head movements, and environment changes, providing richer data on consumer decision-making processes and attention shifts. Mobile tracking can accommodate multitasking and movement, enhancing experimental ecological validity, and is effective in measuring dynamic visual engagement with product packaging, store layouts, and point-of-sale materials beyond static screen presentations.
In contrast, stationary eye tracking is limited to highly controlled, artificial viewing conditions that may not fully capture the complexities of consumer behavior in natural environments. This study reveals that stationary eye tracking is more affected by a centre fixation bias, which may lead to inaccurate interpretations of research results.
Three studies were conducted in total, with 117 participants. The results show that the reported average first fixation locations from stationary and mobile eye tracking are different, suggesting that previous stationary eye tracking research may need to be retested using mobile eye tracking. Researchers should consider the centre fixation bias when interpreting stationary eye tracking results, and managers should exercise caution when interpreting previous stationary eye tracking research, as it is more prone to a centre fixation bias.
In summary, mobile eye tracking's ability to measure gaze integrated with real spatial context and locomotion makes it invaluable for understanding first fixation locations and broader visual behaviors in authentic consumer settings, while stationary trackers are best suited for controlled lab studies with static stimuli. This research sheds light on the limitations of eye tracking as a marketing research method and emphasizes the importance of considering the chosen eye tracking method when designing marketing studies.
As we move forward, managers should trust research that uses mobile eye tracking to test package design's ability to attract attention on a shelf, optimize store shelf planograms, point-of-purchase materials, and shelf layouts. Small-scale pilot studies should be included in papers to demonstrate the chosen method's appropriateness, as it is less affected by attention biases. The field of marketing research will greatly benefit from the increased use of mobile eye tracking, providing more accurate and ecologically valid insights into consumer behavior.
[1] Source: [Citation needed] [2] Source: [Citation needed] [3] Source: [Citation needed]
Read also:
- A Business Model Explained: Its Purpose and Benefits for Your Venture
- Deep-rooted reinforcement of Walkerhughes' acquisitions through strategic appointment of Alison Heitzman
- Unchecked Management of HP Dams Leads to Environmental Disaster: RTI Reveals
- Impact of Trump's Enforced Russia Sanctions Could Compel Putin's Decision-Making
